Market Manipulation. Search

FCA v. Coöperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen–Boerenleenbank B.A. (‘Rabobank’) (benchmark submission rigging, 2013)

Settled

Machine-extracted, pending human review. The structured fields on this page were parsed automatically from the regulator's own release, linked below. Read the primary document before relying on any figure here, and tell us if something is wrong.

In 2013, the Financial Conduct Authority settled an action with Coöperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen–Boerenleenbank B.A. (‘Rabobank’), alleging conduct this library classifies as benchmark submission rigging, cash vs derivatives schemes and price manipulation. The release does not state a monetary figure that we were able to extract.

The record

Structured fields for this action, as recorded in our case library.
Agency FCA
Date filed 2013-10-29
Date resolved 2013-10-29
Status settled
Asset class futures, fx
Venue OTC
Criminal parallel No
Defendants Coöperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen–Boerenleenbank B.A. (‘Rabobank’) (entity)
Techniques Benchmark submission rigging , Cash versus derivatives schemes , Price manipulation

What was ordered

Civil penalty
Disgorgement
Prejudgment interest
Total relief
Alleged gain

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars.

What is alleged to have happened

the Financial Conduct Authority announced this matter on October 29, 2013. The respondents named are Coöperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen–Boerenleenbank B.A. (‘Rabobank’) (0 individuals, 1 entity).

This library tags the matter as benchmark submission rigging, cash vs derivatives schemes and price manipulation, based on the conduct the regulator describes. Each tag links to a page explaining how that technique works, what statute it engages, and what penalties comparable actions have attracted. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: agencies charge statutory provisions, not technique names.

The conduct is recorded against futures and fx, with OTC identified in the release.

For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the release.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with 3 techniques in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

Timeline

  1. 2013-10-29 FCA final notice

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

The linked release is published by the issuing regulator under its own terms. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Action Agency Filed Technique Penalty Status
FCA v. Jeremy Kraft (benchmark submission rigging, 2015) FCA 2015-01-22 Benchmark Submission Rigging , Cash Vs Derivatives Schemes +2 settled
CFTC v. Lloyds Banking Group and Lloyds Bank (benchmark submission rigging, 2014) CFTC 2014-07-29 Benchmark Submission Rigging , Cash Vs Derivatives Schemes +1 $105m judgment
FCA v. The Royal Bank of Scotland plc (benchmark submission rigging, 2013) FCA 2013-02-06 Benchmark Submission Rigging , Cash Vs Derivatives Schemes +2 settled
CFTC v. HSBC Bank USA (cash vs derivatives schemes, 2023) CFTC 2023-11-07 Cash Vs Derivatives Schemes , Insider Trading +2 $1.7bn filed
CFTC v. unnamed respondents (cash vs derivatives schemes, 2022) CFTC 2022-10-20 Cash Vs Derivatives Schemes , Exchange Wash Trading +4 $41m judgment
CFTC v. Bank of America (benchmark submission rigging, 2018) CFTC 2018-09-19 Benchmark Submission Rigging , Price Manipulation $30m judgment

Record added September 9, 2026. submit a correction.